Pros And Cons Of Opposing The Death Penalty

I am not one to know much about the law and the justice system, but I do understand the prosecutor has to request the death penalty as a possible form of punishment before the trial begins. They make this request based on the crime itself. Was there intent, was it planned, and how was it executed. They need to convince the grand jury they have a good strong case and evidence to back it up. If the grand jury excepts the request, then capital punishment will be considered based on the evidence and the verdict of the trial jury. I do believe offenders deserve to be punished, or as how the book says, “paid back” for the crimes they commit. Not always on the terms that is has to be in the same severity of their offense, but if someone, with no doubt, committed first degree murder then I think the death penalty should be considered as the punishment. That is, the defendant performed the crime with premeditation, knew exactly what they wanted to do and did it cold blooded without a second thought. As long as the legal representation is adequate, the evidence of the trial proves without a doubt and the verdict in is guilty of first degree murder, I do believe the death penalty should be the punishment.

I don’t doubt that innocent people have been brought to their death because of capital punishment, but I agree with the retentionists. It is not the intrinsic nature of the institution of capital punishment it stems from, it is from the deficiencies, limitations and imperfections of the criminal law procedures in which the punishment was meted